PDA

View Full Version : The 2013 "Utah Best Case Scenario" Thread



LA Ute
09-22-2013, 07:33 PM
This might be a good thread for keeping track of how we do in our progress toward a bowl game.

Back in early August Ted Miller wrote this, and we are right on track for what Ted laid out as the best we could hope for this year:

Best case-worst case: Utah (http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id/59659/best-case-worst-case-utah-3)

He has us beating USU and Weber State, losing to OSU, and beating BYU.

Then a loss to UCLA and an upset win over Stanford. Another win over Arizona, a loss to USC, and a win against Arizona State. We lose to Oregon, then close out by beating Washington State and Colorado.

Then: "They whip Texas 35-20 in the Holiday Bowl." (That's actually believable based on what we now know about Texas, if they can make a bowl game this year.)

I'm not delusional enough to think we'll be 8-4 and go to the Holiday Bowl, ending up 9-3, but still....it is not impossible. That's what fans do, isn't it -- dream?

830

U-Ute
09-22-2013, 07:51 PM
I see a minimum of 3 more losses; UCLA, Stanford, Oregon.

In order to stay bowl eligible, we will probably need to win 3 of these 4 games:

- 10/19 @Arizona
- 11/9 vs ASU
- 11/23 @WSU
- 11/30 vs Colorado

The interesting thing will be the next 4 weeks. I think we lose to both UCLA and Stanford, then play Arizona, which could go either way. In my mind, the USC game will be a bellwether game. If we are able to win that one, or be in it at the end, then I think we have a good chance of getting 3 of those 4. If not, we may miss bowling for a second straight year.

Jarid in Cedar
09-22-2013, 09:07 PM
There are 3 or 4 more wins on the schedule, but the great thing about this conference is that I can't decide exactly which games to pick as potential wins. I would tier them in the following order:

60-75%-WSU and Colorado. They are both better and dangerous, but they are still weak teams.

50%-Arizona and USC. Arizona is hard to gauge. They are 3-0 against about the equivalent of Weber State. Their passing game is a mess, and they are dependent too much on Carey. Their percentage will move greatly based on their next 2 games.

30-40%- UCLA and ASU. Everyone is in love with UCLA, but their defense is weak against the pass. Could end up being another OSU kind of game. I think we are much closer to ASU, but after the beat down last year, I won't feel much better than this.

5-10%-Stanford and Oregon. I know that I am in the minority on this one, but I like our chances better against Oregon than Stanford simply because we will score some points. Stanford will likely be a closer margin, but because of the way Stanford plays, a 31-17 loss to them will feel like more of a beat down than a 49-63 loss to Oregon.

sancho
09-22-2013, 11:11 PM
5-10%-Stanford and Oregon. I know that I am in the minority on this one, but I like our chances better against Oregon than Stanford simply because we will score some points. Stanford will likely be a closer margin, but because of the way Stanford plays, a 31-17 loss to them will feel like more of a beat down than a 49-63 loss to Oregon.

Stanford will be my first game in RES since I graduated in '01 (been to four road/bowl games since). I will have my lucky button in my wallet. I will drink a lucky halftime Coke. No way we lose that game.

jrj84105
09-23-2013, 04:24 AM
Stanford has us Sandwhiched between UW and UCLA. On the road, in a new venue, this is THE trap game in their schedule.

DrumNFeather
09-23-2013, 06:19 AM
I like that we get UCLA at home on a Thursday night coming off of an emotional win and a bye. Even though as Jarid said, everyone is in love with UCLA, we've beaten them once already in SLC as members of the Pac 12, AND, we played them close last year.

The only game I will go ahead and concede is Oregon. Beyond that, if Utah can avoid a major turnover bug in the first quarter (like we've seen in year's past vs. ASU (twice), Washington etc...) then I think we'll be in each of these games.

As I've said before, this feels like the season before the season that we really breakthrough, but it sure would be nice to do it with 7 or more wins to get this team, and particularly this QB, as much experience as possible.

roseparkutes
09-23-2013, 07:56 AM
best case 11-1realisticly 9-3 with loses to Stanford and Oregon

Applejack
09-23-2013, 08:34 AM
best case 11-1realisticly 9-3 with loses to Stanford and Oregon

I think our best case scenario is a bowl game. I like this team but there are some major weaknesses (pass defense, run blocking) that are going to keep us from competing with the big boys.

To make a bowl, we have to rely on beating Colorado at our place - they are little improved from a terrible team last year. WSU is much improved and on the road; ASU is going to have a field day throwing against us; Arizona looks tough. We are going to need 2 of 3 against WSU, ASU, and Ariz. Any other wins would be gravy, and at this point, highly unexpected.

chrisrenrut
09-23-2013, 08:54 AM
best case 11-1realisticly 9-3 with loses to Stanford and Oregon

I like your enthusiasm, but I don't think there is any way we beat both Arizona and Southern Cal schools. And WSU on the road is not going to be as easy as years past.

My best case is we split the AZ and So Cal schools, beat CU and WSU, play Stanford close, and stay within 25 points of Oregon. 7-5, and a bowl game (not against BYU).

Scorcho
09-23-2013, 09:53 AM
best case 11-1realisticly 9-3 with loses to Stanford and Oregon

ummmmm, sorry Nope!

Brian
09-23-2013, 09:54 AM
This is still a very flawed team. A team that's making progress, and finally has a QB, but still flawed.
I'll be happy with 6 wins, and then make it 7 with a bowl game.
I don't think the defense is good enough yet, and the offense needs a lot of work still....
I'm looking to the next two years.

SheriffCreg
09-23-2013, 10:41 AM
Stanford will be my first game in RES since I graduated in '01 (been to four road/bowl games since). I will have my lucky button in my wallet. I will drink a lucky halftime Coke. No way we lose that game.

I'm feeling better about this game now.

sancho
09-23-2013, 11:00 AM
I like your enthusiasm, but I don't think there is any way we beat both Arizona and Southern Cal schools. And WSU on the road is not going to be as easy as years past.

My best case is we split the AZ and So Cal schools, beat CU and WSU, play Stanford close, and stay within 25 points of Oregon. 7-5, and a bowl game (not against BYU).

Guaranteed wins: Stanford

Toss ups: Zona, CU, Wazzu, USC

Likely losses: ASU, UCLA

For sure losses: Oregon

With the Stanford win, we just need to split the toss-up games to go bowling. Stealing one of the likely losses (they are both home games) would really help us out.

NorthwestUteFan
09-23-2013, 11:28 AM
Wow. I think we have a 10% chance against Stanford. Seeing them just dismantle teams with their methodical offense doesn't give me a warm fuzzy about beating them. Yes we match up well against them but they will bring OSU's passing attack, a better running game than we have seen all season, a defense that is better than byu's front 7 plus a very good secondary, and a tremendous offensive line who will likely dominate us. If we play a perfect game we MIGHT have a chance against them.

But I will say that a win against Stanford would likely be the biggest regular-season win in the history of the program.

LA Ute
09-23-2013, 11:35 AM
Wow. I think we have a 10% chance against Stanford. Seeing them just dismantle teams with their methodical offense doesn't give me a warm fuzzy about beating them. Yes we match up well against them but they will bring OSU's passing attack, a better running game than we have seen all season, a defense that is better than byu's front 7 plus a very good secondary, and a tremendous offensive line who will likely dominate us. If we play a perfect game we MIGHT have a chance against them.

But I will say that a win against Stanford would likely be the biggest regular-season win in the history of the program.

Sancho has this one.

sancho
09-23-2013, 11:40 AM
Sancho has this one.

Yep, I will not let us lose that game. In addition to my first return to RES, it will be my son's first game in SLC (and the Utes are a lucky 1-0 in games he has attended). Stanford may as well not show up.

Stanford and USC are the two remaining defenses that are better than BYUs. We will need to convert 3rd and long against them a few times. We will need more of the big plays, and we will need more than 20 points (at least against the Cardinal -- 20 might do the job vs USC).

Scorcho
09-23-2013, 11:46 AM
Stanford is currently in a different stratopshere than Utah. I wish it wasn't true, but it just is.

Applejack
09-23-2013, 11:48 AM
Stanford is currently in a different stratopshere than Utah. I wish it wasn't true, but it just is.

I agree, but you aren't factoring in how much Sancho REALLY wants this one. That tips the scales for me.

U-Ute
09-23-2013, 11:54 AM
Sancho has this one.

It would be the signature P12 win the program is looking for.

U-Ute
09-23-2013, 11:56 AM
I agree, but you aren't factoring in how much Sancho REALLY wants this one. That tips the scales for me.

I'm on my way to bet the house on it right now..

wally
09-23-2013, 03:16 PM
I agree, but you aren't factoring in how much Sancho REALLY wants this one. That tips the scales for me.

Same here. Kinda funny how when I hear Van Noy REALLY wanted the rivalry game, I was like: "whatevs, we all want stuff and we can't just have it by simply REALLY wanting it!"

But when I really think about Sancho's assertion, I just can't say the same thing. KVN should have had a lucky button and a lucky halftime coke or something.

sancho
09-23-2013, 03:29 PM
831

SoCalPat
09-24-2013, 08:38 AM
Our offense is good enough to get a win from the three perceived unwinnable games -- UCLA, Stanford and Oregon. After the Oregon State loss, winning one of these games is a must to get to eight wins. And we have another 56-53-like game ahead of us this year.

We can still get there by winning the rest, but I think our defense will let us down against either ASU, Arizona or USC. We win a minimum of one of those games, and I think we're good enough to get two wins. Until proven otherwise, we will be favored against WSU and Colorado. I'm still solidly in the eight wins camp.

Applejack
09-24-2013, 09:56 AM
Our offense is good enough to get a win from the three perceived unwinnable games -- UCLA, Stanford and Oregon. After the Oregon State loss, winning one of these games is a must to get to eight wins. And we have another 56-53-like game ahead of us this year.

We can still get there by winning the rest, but I think our defense will let us down against either ASU, Arizona or USC. We win a minimum of one of those games, and I think we're good enough to get two wins. Until proven otherwise, we will be favored against WSU and Colorado. I'm still solidly in the eight wins camp.

I think you will be disappointed, unfortunately. I would guess that we will be fairly heavy underdogs in the ASU, Airizona, and USC games (7 points). I think we can hang with all of them, but I highly doubt we sweep them or even take two. I'd be thrilled with one.

concerned
09-24-2013, 10:20 AM
WSU is not going to be easy in Pullman. They are improving. We could easily lose that one.

Utah
09-24-2013, 10:32 AM
I think a bowl game is an extremely successful season because the PAC-12 is AMAZING this year. Have you seen our OOC record? It is unreal. Also, look at these stats (PAC-12 and SEC):

Top 25 offenses in total yards: Texas A&M (1), Utah (10), Oregon (11), LSU (18), OSU (21), Wash (25)
Top 25 offense in yards per game: Oregon (2), Washingon (3), UCLA (4), A&M (5), Georgia (6), Missouri (7), Cal (9), Utah (20), Kentucky/Ole Miss (25)
Points per game: Oregon (2), UCLA (3), A&M (6), Missouri (8), Arizona (15), LSU (16), Wash (18), Utah (20), OSU (24)

Holy crap. Considering how good BYU's and USU's defenses are, we have a FREAKING GREAT offense. Incredible.

Now to defense:

Total Defense: Florida (2), USC (4), WSU (10), Wash (12), Arkansas (17), LSU/Miss St (24), Arizona (26), Colorado (29), Oregon (30), Ole Miss (33), ASU (35)
Team Pass Eff Defense: Florida (3), Wash (7), Arizona (11), USC (12), Oregon (13), Wash St (15), LSU (20), Colorado (21),
Turnover Margin: Oregon (2), ASU (3), Missouri (11), Miss St (13), Colorado (19),

We are toe to toe with the SEC, including a better record against them this year, when Oregon killed Tennessee. If you did not look at the past year's successes, you would look at the PAC-12 and SEC and say they are neck and neck, with the slight edge going to the PAC-12 as the BEST conference in the country.

We HAVE to get our secondary issues figured out. The good news is Hans said that his sources close to Hoffman said that he really struggled to get separation from McGill last weekend. A HUGE step in the right direction.

The UCLA game is winnable, but we have to play perfect, unlike the OSU game. We can't have Orchard get two PF penalties (btw, he played AMAZING against BYU. He wasn't in the stat box, but he was very, very good), can't have Dres give up on two passes that lead to INT's, can't give up any 3rd/4th and longs, etc. We can put points on anyone, we need to take care of the ball and not give up big plays. If we can get better, our bend-but-don't-break defense is more than adequate to win 8 games. But we have to play assignment sound football (again, another shout out to Orchard. He was AMAZING against BYU. He held his edge perfectly, allowing Honeycutt to dominate the read option. The guy should get amazing props for doing his job and allowing others to make plays. He was terrific).

SheriffCreg
09-24-2013, 10:51 AM
I think if we come as prepared for UCLA as we did for BYU, we hang in there with a chance to win, so long as we don't make big mistakes throughout the game.

While watching the BYU game, I kept thinking, this one is on the coaches. Utah came prepared, and it makes me very glad that BYU beat Texas in such an obvious way, because it gave us such a straight-forward game-plan in knowing exactly what we needed to prepare for. UCLA has more weapons than BYU, but if the coaches come as prepared for UCLA as they did for this last Saturday, I think we have a good shot.

Virginia Ute
09-24-2013, 10:59 AM
Wow. I think we have a 10% chance against Stanford. Seeing them just dismantle teams with their methodical offense doesn't give me a warm fuzzy about beating them. Yes we match up well against them but they will bring OSU's passing attack, a better running game than we have seen all season, a defense that is better than byu's front 7 plus a very good secondary, and a tremendous offensive line who will likely dominate us. If we play a perfect game we MIGHT have a chance against them.

But I will say that a win against Stanford would likely be the biggest regular-season win in the history of the program.

I'm with you on this. Stanford isn't as flashy as Oregon, so I tend to underestimate them. After seeing what they did to ASU last week, I'm putting that game in the Oregon category as a conceded loss....it would take a miracle beyond what sancho can provide us to beat those guys.

LA Ute
09-24-2013, 11:01 AM
I'm with you on this. Stanford isn't as flashy as Oregon, so I tend to underestimate them. After seeing what they did to ASU last week, I'm putting that game in the Oregon category as a conceded loss....it would take a miracle beyond what sancho can provide us to beat those guys.

As long as Sancho has his magic button we have a chance. I'm not conceding.

SoCalPat
09-24-2013, 12:41 PM
I think you will be disappointed, unfortunately. I would guess that we will be fairly heavy underdogs in the ASU, Airizona, and USC games (7 points). I think we can hang with all of them, but I highly doubt we sweep them or even take two. I'd be thrilled with one.

I don't call a TD as being a "heavy" underdog. Shoot, we were getting 7 points just last week.

Using Sagarin's Predictor model, ASU essentially a pickem game (ASU -1 at worst), Arizona is -3.5 and USC -6.5. Those are all winnable games. What should be of come concern (and concerned nailed it) is that we'd be getting a point in Pullman based on the same model. We would be two TD favorites against Colorado, but don't be shocked if we're less than a TD dog to Stanford. In fact, if we beat UCLA, I would suspect an opener of Stanford -10.5, but quickly bet down to Stanford -6.5/7.5.

LA Ute
10-06-2013, 03:53 PM
I think 7-5 is our new best case scenario now. Arizona, ASU, WSU and Colorado. And none of those is a gimme.

cald22well
10-07-2013, 09:14 AM
My realistic prediction is 6-6. Lose to Stanford, split with AZ and USC, then beat ASU to get to 5-4. Lose back to back at Oregon and WSU, then beat Colordao to become bowl eligible. Best case would be to win 2 more of those road games to finish 8-4.

With the exception of Oregon, I think that Utah has showed that they have the talent and ability to compete with and possibly beat anyone in the conference. Utah has to start winning the turnover battle to get conference wins though. If we continue to lose the turnover battle though, it's not crazy to think we could end up 4-8.

It's a roller coaster, but damn the Pac-12 is fun.

LA Ute
10-07-2013, 09:24 AM
I think the remainder of the season depends on the offensive line play. If you watch the replay of the game you'll see that the left side is like a sieve, especially in the second half. Stanford and the other teams are watching the same film. If that can't be corrected (e.g., if it's a talent problem) we'll really struggle, because we'll lose Wilson's passing as a weapon.

cald22well
10-08-2013, 09:23 AM
From what I saw, I think that it can be fixed with coaching/scheme. A lot of times, they were so worried about the edge rush that they gave up the inside. In fact on one play, both Jeremiah's kicked outside and the LB ran straight through the gap that was created. If Tofaeono stays inside, then Wilson has plenty of time.

In my opinion, it doesn't make sense to have the G help the T. Keep the G where he's supposed to be and have a TE or RB chip on the outside to help with the speed rush. Poutasi does need to work on his kick though to prevent that edge without having to turn his hips and give up the inside. Again, coaching can fix that issue. Also, I would have liked to see more RB screens to that side. It only takes one or two to keep the defense honest.

Physically, I don't think that the Utes are subpar at any position. We have great athletes all over, it's just the experience and coaching up the small issues that can have big impacts. Look at how improved the corners are from the beginning of the year. Once the line starts playing better and the defense forces turnovers, we will be a tough out for anyone in the conference.

SoCalPat
10-08-2013, 12:49 PM
From what I saw, I think that it can be fixed with coaching/scheme. A lot of times, they were so worried about the edge rush that they gave up the inside. In fact on one play, both Jeremiah's kicked outside and the LB ran straight through the gap that was created. If Tofaeono stays inside, then Wilson has plenty of time.

In my opinion, it doesn't make sense to have the G help the T. Keep the G where he's supposed to be and have a TE or RB chip on the outside to help with the speed rush. Poutasi does need to work on his kick though to prevent that edge without having to turn his hips and give up the inside. Again, coaching can fix that issue. Also, I would have liked to see more RB screens to that side. It only takes one or two to keep the defense honest.

Physically, I don't think that the Utes are subpar at any position. We have great athletes all over, it's just the experience and coaching up the small issues that can have big impacts. Look at how improved the corners are from the beginning of the year. Once the line starts playing better and the defense forces turnovers, we will be a tough out for anyone in the conference.

I would bet my dollar to your dime that Kyle, in confidence, would tell you this is not the case at wide receiver. Ken Scott is the real deal, but every other person we send out there has major shortcomings in either speed, toughness/strength or smarts. And with the injuries to Murphy and Tonga, we're extremely thin at TE now as well.

cald22well
10-08-2013, 01:42 PM
I would bet my dollar to your dime that Kyle, in confidence, would tell you this is not the case at wide receiver. Ken Scott is the real deal, but every other person we send out there has major shortcomings in either speed, toughness/strength or smarts. And with the injuries to Murphy and Tonga, we're extremely thin at TE now as well.

Hence why I qualified it by saying physically. Not every receiver is going to have speed, height, and strength. We have quite a few small receivers, but they are all fast and can move well with the ball that are great for the slot position. We also have some slower receivers that are bigger, stronger, targets that are good outside targets. Smarts is most definitely mental and not physical and I would even argue that hands are more mental than physical as well.

My point is that I look at our roster and don't see hardly any players that just simply don't have the ability. I'm not saying that all or even most will, but the players we have can become very good players with coaching and experience.

Jarid in Cedar
10-08-2013, 02:45 PM
To me, this years team is 5 Pac-12 caliber players away:

1. Wide receiver(he is on the team, just got hurt the 2nd offensive series of the year)
2. Left tackle. JP is the best lineman we have, which is why he is at LT, but he is a better fit at RT(or LG even better)
3. A safety that would remind us of RoJo
4. An all conference LB(He is also on the team sitting out a transfer from Miami)
5. A DE in the mold of Paul Kruger

SoCalPat
10-08-2013, 02:58 PM
Hence why I qualified it by saying physically. Not every receiver is going to have speed, height, and strength. We have quite a few small receivers, but they are all fast and can move well with the ball that are great for the slot position. We also have some slower receivers that are bigger, stronger, targets that are good outside targets. Smarts is most definitely mental and not physical and I would even argue that hands are more mental than physical as well.

My point is that I look at our roster and don't see hardly any players that just simply don't have the ability. I'm not saying that all or even most will, but the players we have can become very good players with coaching and experience.

I read what you're saying as we have a lot of receivers that, optimally, develop into No. 3 wide receivers. To me, that means we're physically subpar at that position. Denham is a senior. Sean Fitzgerald has been in the program 6 years. He's not going to blossom into a Braden Godfrey like player with better coaching. Coaching ain't gonna make Geoff Norwood into the greatest WR the Pac-12 has ever seen at 5-8, 178.

We need better players at WR, specifically, guys that can punish shorter DBs or slower safeties. Not better coaching. Want to make this unit better this season? Pray and hope we can find a way to get Andre Lewis on the field this year.

SoCalPat
10-08-2013, 02:59 PM
To me, this years team is 5 Pac-12 caliber players away:

1. Wide receiver(he is on the team, just got hurt the 2nd offensive series of the year)
2. Left tackle. JP is the best lineman we have, which is why he is at LT, but he is a better fit at RT(or LG even better)
3. A safety that would remind us of RoJo
4. An all conference LB(He is also on the team sitting out a transfer from Miami)
5. A DE in the mold of Paul Kruger

Shoot, we're 2-0 in league play with just Nos. 1 and 3 (or any defensive player who consistently makes game-changing plays).

Jarid in Cedar
10-08-2013, 03:02 PM
I read what you're saying as we have a lot of receivers that, optimally, develop into No. 3 wide receivers. To me, that means we're physically subpar at that position. Denham is a senior. Sean Fitzgerald has been in the program 6 years. He's not going to blossom into a Braden Godfrey like player with better coaching. Coaching ain't gonna make Geoff Norwood into the greatest WR the Pac-12 has ever seen at 5-8, 178.

We need better players at WR, specifically, guys that can punish shorter DBs or slower safeties. Not better coaching. Want to make this unit better this season? Pray and hope we can find a way to get Andre Lewis on the field this year.

I think that both Denham and Fitz are adequate #3 receivers. Trouble is that we don't have our #1(I think that Scott is the alpha out of him and Dres). If Scott is in with Dres, they both command respect from a safety over the top(for different reasons). If he is there, you can use formation to get the #3(and/or Murphy) matched up in a favorable spot. As it is, Fitz at the #2 can be covered by a CB without help, which allows more attention to Dres and the ability to cover Denham with a SS or OLB.

Jarid in Cedar
10-08-2013, 03:05 PM
Shoot, we're 2-0 in league play with just Nos. 1 and 3 (or any defensive player who consistently makes game-changing plays).

I agree. I am looking at what we need to be a consistent top 25 team. If we had 2 of those 5, we would be a 6-3 team in conference. If we had all 5, we would be a 8-1, 7-2 team.

wally
10-08-2013, 04:15 PM
To me, this years team is 5 Pac-12 caliber players away:

1. Wide receiver(he is on the team, just got hurt the 2nd offensive series of the year)
2. Left tackle. JP is the best lineman we have, which is why he is at LT, but he is a better fit at RT(or LG even better)
3. A safety that would remind us of RoJo
4. An all conference LB(He is also on the team sitting out a transfer from Miami)
5. A DE in the mold of Paul Kruger

Based on this list, as well as returning starters, I am hopeful for a decent run next year.

1. "Check" - if Scott get's back to where he was post injury,
2. This is the line item that needs the most offensive focus. Will a soph JP improve enough by next year not have to egregiously hold on every other play? OL is also where Utah loses 2 of 3 seniors on O.
3. Can Rowe remind us of RoJo by next year?
4. "Check" Gionni Paul alongside returning LBs and maybe even Pita should be a major step up.
5. Do you think that Orchard has some more improvement in him by next year to accomplish this?

Overall, if we can improve the Oline by next year, DE should have good selection of offensive tools to work with (Travis, Poole, Dres, Scott, Murphy, Radley).

Defense will be more experienced in the backfield, more talented and experienced at LB, and hopefully we have some underclass DL ready to fill in for palepoi and LT. Reilly will be missed.

Should I upgrade my outlook for next season to Optimistic from Hopeful?

UBlender
10-08-2013, 04:43 PM
To me, this years team is 5 Pac-12 caliber players away:

1. Wide receiver(he is on the team, just got hurt the 2nd offensive series of the year)
2. Left tackle. JP is the best lineman we have, which is why he is at LT, but he is a better fit at RT(or LG even better)
3. A safety that would remind us of RoJo
4. An all conference LB(He is also on the team sitting out a transfer from Miami)
5. A DE in the mold of Paul Kruger

I'm not sure I wouldn't swap #5 for a lockdown corner. I think our DEs are pretty good, not Paul Kruger good, but I don't think the margin between a Paul Kruger and a Trevor Reilly is as great as it is between (pick one of our great corners over the last several years) and Keith McGill (although admittedly McGill has improved a lot).

cald22well
10-08-2013, 08:42 PM
I read what you're saying as we have a lot of receivers that, optimally, develop into No. 3 wide receivers. To me, that means we're physically subpar at that position. Denham is a senior. Sean Fitzgerald has been in the program 6 years. He's not going to blossom into a Braden Godfrey like player with better coaching. Coaching ain't gonna make Geoff Norwood into the greatest WR the Pac-12 has ever seen at 5-8, 178.

We need better players at WR, specifically, guys that can punish shorter DBs or slower safeties. Not better coaching. Want to make this unit better this season? Pray and hope we can find a way to get Andre Lewis on the field this year.

I don't know why you seem to think that every receiver has to be Calvin Johnson to have success. The Eagles have had good production out of DeSean Jackson and Jeremy Maclin. Both under 200 lbs. Maclin is listed right at 6', which means he is probably shorter. Larry Fitzgerald has great height, but reportedly runs a 4.6 40. And those are just examples off of the top of my head. I don't expect things to magically get better for this year, but I do think that some freshmen can step up if given the opportunity and become very good receivers in the future. Next year, we presumably have Scott and Anderson, two very good receivers. Lewis, as you mentioned. I believe that Brian Allen at 6'3'' 208lbs can be a very good receiver in the future. And I also like the smaller, quick receivers we have for the slot position. I also like the 2 receivers that we have committed if we can hold on to them. Again, I was talking about their physical abilities. Obviously a lot more than that goes into being a good WR, and I never said that they would become all americans just because of their physical abilities, but we have good athletes.

SoCalPat
10-09-2013, 11:39 AM
I don't know why you seem to think that every receiver has to be Calvin Johnson to have success. The Eagles have had good production out of DeSean Jackson and Jeremy Maclin. Both under 200 lbs. Maclin is listed right at 6', which means he is probably shorter. Larry Fitzgerald has great height, but reportedly runs a 4.6 40. And those are just examples off of the top of my head. I don't expect things to magically get better for this year, but I do think that some freshmen can step up if given the opportunity and become very good receivers in the future. Next year, we presumably have Scott and Anderson, two very good receivers. Lewis, as you mentioned. I believe that Brian Allen at 6'3'' 208lbs can be a very good receiver in the future. And I also like the smaller, quick receivers we have for the slot position. I also like the 2 receivers that we have committed if we can hold on to them. Again, I was talking about their physical abilities. Obviously a lot more than that goes into being a good WR, and I never said that they would become all americans just because of their physical abilities, but we have good athletes.

Let's keep this topic about college football, please.

We have to rely on future recruits and unproven players on the roster to strengthen the position, yet things won't magically get better this year. You can call it what you want, but it's not on par with the majority of the Pac-12.

cald22well
10-09-2013, 02:21 PM
Let's keep this topic about college football, please.

We have to rely on future recruits and unproven players on the roster to strengthen the position, yet things won't magically get better this year. You can call it what you want, but it's not on par with the majority of the Pac-12.

First off, I pointed those players out because they were big time college players. Second, how many times do I have to point out what I actually said compared to how you're taking it. I said what I said, and you're going to change it to fit what you want to argue about. We'll agree to disagree and leave it at that.

DrumNFeather
10-15-2013, 07:47 AM
Bumping this thread...

After the win over Stanford, the best case scenario could change drastically. I think this team has the chops to get to 8-4, despite the back half of the schedule being a challenge.

sancho
10-15-2013, 08:32 AM
Bumping this thread...

After the win over Stanford, the best case scenario could change drastically. I think this team has the chops to get to 8-4, despite the back half of the schedule being a challenge.

It's strange that this is essentially our first road test of the season. We'll have to see how it goes. Oregon is a loss. Arizona State seems to be clicking on offense, and they sure know how to attack our defense. Is USC better now without Kiffin? Looks like it. Wazzu and CU are still must win games for us.

DrumNFeather
10-15-2013, 08:41 AM
It's strange that this is essentially our first road test of the season. We'll have to see how it goes. Oregon is a loss. Arizona State seems to be clicking on offense, and they sure know how to attack our defense. Is USC better now without Kiffin? Looks like it. Wazzu and CU are still must win games for us.

I tend to agree. If we want to be a team in the upper half of the league, we've got to win road games like this one. ASU does seem to have our number a little bit, but given that it will be our only home game in a stretch of 5, perhaps it'll be enough to win a close one. Like I noted above, it would just be nice to not be relying on beating the dregs of the conference just to see a bowl game. Don't get me wrong, I'd take it, but this team seems to have some potential here to build momentum toward next year, and I'm not sure 6-6 accomplishes that. Here's hoping. One at a time though, gotta get the Wildcats.

Applejack
10-15-2013, 09:51 AM
I tend to agree. If we want to be a team in the upper half of the league, we've got to win road games like this one. ASU does seem to have our number a little bit, but given that it will be our only home game in a stretch of 5, perhaps it'll be enough to win a close one. Like I noted above, it would just be nice to not be relying on beating the dregs of the conference just to see a bowl game. Don't get me wrong, I'd take it, but this team seems to have some potential here to build momentum toward next year, and I'm not sure 6-6 accomplishes that. Here's hoping. One at a time though, gotta get the Wildcats.

I really want a win on Saturday. That gets us to 5 wins and we can sort of count on beating Colorado, so I would feel great about our bowlea chances. I think our team this year is built to handle teams like Stanford - just line it up and hit. We are going to struggle with teams that stretch the field (i.e. USU, ASU, Oregon). I hope that we can do a better job defending WSU than we did against OSU, but those are similarly built teams.

USC is the real wildcard in all of this. They have enough talent to run the table, but they could also just pack it up and quit at any time.

U-Ute
10-15-2013, 10:05 AM
All Hail The Button!

wally
10-15-2013, 11:28 AM
All Hail The Button!

No shit!! Sancho, can you please glue that thing to RES in a discreet location? TIA.

Sisyphus
10-15-2013, 11:36 AM
Any plans of Sancho to breeze through Tucson this coming Saturday? The board should start a collection plate...

sancho
10-15-2013, 07:43 PM
The story of the button:

My sister and I returned from our LDS missions at the same time (one day apart). It was between semesters at the U, so my family took a vacation to the Oregon coast. We stopped in Pendleton, Oregon, so my Dad could buy wool shirts. In the woolen mill store, there was a large barrel full of buttons. I was combing through them, a little bored, while waiting for my Dad. The lucky button called out to me, so I bought it. During our vacation, Utah beat West Virginia and Arizona to advance to the Final Four. The button has been in my wallet ever since.

I recommend the lucky button barrel to all who pass through Pendleton, Oregon.

Devildog
10-16-2013, 07:32 AM
Well here we sit at the middle of the season. We are right smack in the middle of the PAC.

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id/63436/pac-12-power-rankings-week-7-4

How many of us thought we would be here 4-2, heading into Arizona?

At the start of this season, I was just hoping our young team could get back in bowl shape and put together 6 wins (or more).

Now that we are here, I still don't know if I believe that we have the horses to beat Arizona, ASU, and USC. But at least I do believe that we might.


:utes:

DrumNFeather
10-16-2013, 08:02 AM
From the Pac 12 Mailbag...I think this guy's response is pretty dead-on with how I hope the coaches are approaching Arizona and the remainder of the schedule:

Greg in Salt Lake City writes: "If you don't like where you are in the Power Rankings, play better." Oh, like maybe beat No. 5 Stanford? Done. Wait, that didn't really help. Utah is a few turnovers away from being undefeated, they get better every week and just beat Stanford. Because Power Rankings (http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id/63436/pac-12-power-rankings-week-7-4) take the most recent games into account more we should definitely be ahead of Oregon State and Washington -- neither of which has beat a team that is still ranked. I would think a former MWC guy would show a little more respect ;)

Kevin Gemmell: I appreciate the passion, Greg. I really do. And I particularly appreciate the emoticon wink. And as a former MWC guy, I've followed Utah's rise in that conference and transition to the Pac-12 with great interest.

For the record, it did help. You moved up from seventh to sixth in this week’s Power Rankings.

No, you shouldn’t be ahead of Oregon State or Washington. You lost to Oregon State. Any way you slice it, the Beavers have more wins and beat you at home. As for Washington, we’ll find out more about them this week when the Huskies travel to Arizona State. Washington lost to Stanford on the road by a field goal. You beat Stanford at home by two field goals. Washington’s two losses have been to top-five teams. Utah’s losses have been to a top 15 team and an unranked team. Plus Utah has had the luxury of not having to go out of state yet.

I think the Stanford win was a critical stepping stone for the Utes, but it’s how they follow it up that will be extremely telling.

This isn’t the Mountain West where the entire season boils down to one game against TCU. You beat Stanford. Great. Now can you go on the road and beat Arizona? At USC? Can you avenge the beating you took last year from ASU? Can you win at Autzen?

Recall Washington scored two wins over top-10 teams last year, but still finished with seven wins and the season was perceived as unsuccessful. If Utah fails to make it to the postseason, how much does this one win really mean? Not a whole lot. You'll be viewed as the team that just caught Stanford on a bad day on the road rather than a team that is climbing the Pac-12 pecking order.

It was a good win. What are you going to do with it?

concerned
10-16-2013, 08:23 AM
From the Pac 12 Mailbag...I think this guy's response is pretty dead-on with how I hope the coaches are approaching Arizona and the remainder of the schedule:

Greg in Salt Lake City writes: "If you don't like where you are in the Power Rankings, play better." Oh, like maybe beat No. 5 Stanford? Done. Wait, that didn't really help. Utah is a few turnovers away from being undefeated, they get better every week and just beat Stanford. Because Power Rankings (http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id/63436/pac-12-power-rankings-week-7-4) take the most recent games into account more we should definitely be ahead of Oregon State and Washington -- neither of which has beat a team that is still ranked. I would think a former MWC guy would show a little more respect ;)

Kevin Gemmell: I appreciate the passion, Greg. I really do. And I particularly appreciate the emoticon wink. And as a former MWC guy, I've followed Utah's rise in that conference and transition to the Pac-12 with great interest.

For the record, it did help. You moved up from seventh to sixth in this week’s Power Rankings.

No, you shouldn’t be ahead of Oregon State or Washington. You lost to Oregon State. Any way you slice it, the Beavers have more wins and beat you at home. As for Washington, we’ll find out more about them this week when the Huskies travel to Arizona State. Washington lost to Stanford on the road by a field goal. You beat Stanford at home by two field goals. Washington’s two losses have been to top-five teams. Utah’s losses have been to a top 15 team and an unranked team. Plus Utah has had the luxury of not having to go out of state yet.

I think the Stanford win was a critical stepping stone for the Utes, but it’s how they follow it up that will be extremely telling.

This isn’t the Mountain West where the entire season boils down to one game against TCU. You beat Stanford. Great. Now can you go on the road and beat Arizona? At USC? Can you avenge the beating you took last year from ASU? Can you win at Autzen?

Recall Washington scored two wins over top-10 teams last year, but still finished with seven wins and the season was perceived as unsuccessful. If Utah fails to make it to the postseason, how much does this one win really mean? Not a whole lot. You'll be viewed as the team that just caught Stanford on a bad day on the road rather than a team that is climbing the Pac-12 pecking order.

It was a good win. What are you going to do with it?

What are we going to do with it indeed. Great answer. its up to us now.

SoCalPat
10-16-2013, 08:47 AM
Well here we sit at the middle of the season. We are right smack in the middle of the PAC.

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id/63436/pac-12-power-rankings-week-7-4

How many of us thought we would be here 4-2, heading into Arizona?

At the start of this season, I was just hoping our young team could get back in bowl shape and put together 6 wins (or more).

Now that we are here, I still don't know if I believe that we have the horses to beat Arizona, ASU, and USC. But at least I do believe that we might.

I thought we could get to 8 and I knew getting to 8 would almost certainly mean a win vs. either UCLA, Stanford or Oregon. Getting to 4-2 at this point was a must, but that's results-based thinking. My process called for us beating OSU, losing to Stanford but beating Oregon. Knowing how close we are to being 5-1 or better, I'm very happy with how this season has gone, especially given where we stood mid-third quarter against Utah State.

Utah
10-16-2013, 09:38 AM
I really thought we were going to surprise this year, and I was hoping for 5-1 right now. I thought we would beat OSU and UCLA and lose to Stanford.

U-Ute
10-16-2013, 10:08 AM
Well here we sit at the middle of the season. We are right smack in the middle of the PAC.

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id/63436/pac-12-power-rankings-week-7-4

How many of us thought we would be here 4-2, heading into Arizona?

At the start of this season, I was just hoping our young team could get back in bowl shape and put together 6 wins (or more).

Now that we are here, I still don't know if I believe that we have the horses to beat Arizona, ASU, and USC. But at least I do believe that we might.


I thought 4-2 was right where we would be at. Although, I figured we'd beat Oregon State and lose to Stanford, so the details are a bit off.

:D

Devildog
10-16-2013, 10:43 AM
I thought 4-2 was right where we would be at. Although, I figured we'd beat Oregon State and lose to Stanford, so the details are a bit off.

:D

Me too. Early in the season, I also thought we would beat Oregon State and probably lose to Stanford.

I did figure around 4-2 at this point. The victory over Stanford has me considering that winning a couple against the more difficult teams like Arizona, ASU, and USC might be possible... and therefore almost assumes we should beat the weaker teams remaining - Wazzoo and CU.

This is an optimistic view from halfway through the season... I like it, and hope it continues.

8-4 heading for a bowl game would be outstanding! I still think it's unrealistic that we can beat Oregon.

SeattleUte
10-16-2013, 10:46 AM
We can beat Oregon. Weirder thinngs have happened. Washington was close nearing the fourth quarter and had made some deadly mistakes. Whit is capable of excelling in these situations, and Dennis knows Oregon well. Fortunately we're playing them late in the season and we're improving. Stanford won in Eugene last season.

Devildog
10-16-2013, 10:56 AM
I hope you're right SU.

Stranger things have happened. I would be elated... and shocked.

LA Ute
10-18-2013, 09:53 PM
Seems to fit here as well as anywhere. Fun to watch. Some good field-legal game clips.

Dennis Erickson Coaching U (http://vimeo.com/77075673)

U-Ute
10-20-2013, 08:10 AM
So, now that we've fallen back to earth and have been rudely reminded of how difficult road wins are to get in the PAC-12, it looks like we're back to 6-6 (CU and @WSU), or possibly 7-5 if we win @USC or beat ASU.

LA Ute
10-20-2013, 08:38 AM
So, now that we've fallen back to earth and have been rudely reminded of how difficult road wins are to get in the PAC-12, it looks like we're back to 6-6 (CU and @WSU), or possibly 7-5 if we win @USC or beat ASU.

6-6 is a reasonable expectation. 7-6 would be a fine season got this team. That said, they are scrappy and tough and well-coached and may yet surprise some teams. Still, anything above 6-6 is gravy. If Wilson is hurt seriously, then even 6-6 is gravy.